Following reports from Saturday about the upcoming meeting between US President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan, the US President announced a new $375 million package of military package to Ukraine, on Sunday.

While the White House refrained from confirming as to whether Biden will use his Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to unlock a new military package for Ukraine, it published, on Sunday, the memorandum authorizing the PDA.

The memorandum for the Secretary of State read "I hereby delegate to the Secretary of State the authority under section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, to direct the drawdown of up to $375 million in defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, to provide assistance to Ukraine and to make the determinations required under such section to direct such a drawdown."

According to the US State Department, PDA "allows for the speedy delivery of defense articles and services" from existing Department of Defense stocks "to foreign countries and international organizations to respond to unforeseen emergencies."

Biden also, according to the meeting readout, underscored Washington's "readiness to continue delivering security assistance to meet Ukraine’s immediate battlefield needs."

Moreover, the US President announced the support, of the US and other G7 nations, for "Ukraine’s reconstruction, including efforts to rebuild its energy infrastructure, and Ukraine’s implementation of reforms needed to fulfill its Euro-Atlantic aspirations."

In turn, during the remarks, Ukraine's Zelensky thanked Biden, "the American people...Congress, bipartisan support" and noted, "I know that you gave us a very big package during this year; it’s more than $37 billion."

It is also worth noting that Biden, during the meeting, commended Zelensky's commitment "to a just peace."

Responsible Statecraft underscores unaligned US-Ukraine interests

In a report published on April 30th, Responsible Statecraft (RS) highlighted diverging interests between Washington and Kiev regarding what the war in Ukraine is about and how it must end.

According to the report, US Representative Joe Wilson alongside Representative Steve Cohen have co-sponsored a so-called Ukrainian Victory Resolution have co-sponsored a so-called Ukrainian Victory Resolution on the grounds that "We must not repeat the error of Sept. 1, 1939."

Emulating Cold War-era thinking, the representatives framed the resolution with the rhetoric of that era with the aspiration that Ukraine can regain its 1991 borders and will be brought into NATO once victory is achieved and the war is over. So far, the bill has 18 bipartisan co-sponsors.

Earlier in April, a group of hawks from both parties in Congress unveiled the new "Victory" resolution, the RS report detailed.

In a similar attempt, Senators Lindsey Graham, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Richard Blumenthal also introduced a resolution after three senators and 16 House Republicans addressed a letter to US President Joe Biden noting their refusal to support any new Ukrainian "aid" if it would not be paired with an explicit diplomatic strategy to put an end to the war in Ukraine.

What do such resolutions mean?

According to Responsible Statecraft, the two resolutions are set to drive the conversation about the "extent of US Ukraine policy and support ahead of an expected Ukrainian counteroffensive this spring."

The suggested resolutions argued two main points. Primarily they denote that the US fully backs the argument that victory in Ukraine cannot be achieved until Kiev restores its 1991 borders; meaning the retake of not just the Donbass region, but also Crimea.

In the event that the US adopts such a policy, the "unrealistic goal" set above, the US would be forcing its own hand into a direct confrontation with Russia. Any attempt to recapture Crimea could result in dangerous consequences. RS explained that any such attempt "could provoke Russian escalation, up to and including the use of nuclear weapons."

The officials in Kiev would be thrilled to hear that the US fully supported Ukraine in restoring its 1991 border. However, at a time when Ukraine lacked the capabilities "to achieve those goals on the ground," the RS report argued, the US would be sending a dangerous message that "seems more likely to blow up in the faces of both Washington and Kyiv."

This overly ambitious definition of "victory" would inevitably prolong the war.

Read more: Ukraine says hopes to get F-16 fighter jets by fall